Dungeon Siege 3 was just announced by Square Enix but I was rather surprised to read that not GPG but Obsidian will develop the game! IIRC Dungeon Siege was the first large franchise of GPG. DS3 was already announced by Chris Taylor 2 years ago and the development was obviously postponed at some point. Chris Taylor will serve as an advisor during the development but SE owns the Dungeon Siege IP (SupCom too). There is a lot of room for speculations about the background behind this announcement: Did SE wrestle the DS IP from GPG? Did CT offer it to them because the development team is no longer large enough to support several large titles at the same time? Why was the development of Dungeon Siege 3 postponed in the first place after the announcement two years ago? How did Obsidian enter the picture? They are well known for their work on several very successful RPGs - why didn't they develop an IP of their own instead? Is Square Enix pushing for the western markets by throwing money at well known franchises and development studios now? Don't they trust GPG with singleplayer titles and storytelling anymore after the rather underwhelming SupCom2 campaign? Will a possible SupCom3 be developed by GPG or maybe yet another development studio?!? So many questions and so little known facts to answer them. Feel free to specualte!
Yeah, probably better this way... Does it make sense that I post updates on what GPG is doing atm at all? Most of the community here could care less and you devs probably know about it anyway already but can't really comment. :?
Obsidian wants to add more story (not as much as in Fallout 3) and improve the ingame quests and stuff. Sounds pretty good to me but some of the old 'hack and slash' fans are already complaining... Will be interesting to see how the franchise changes with a new developer. But so far Obsidian has produced very good games, I will keep an eye on this one too.
What? It's just Fallout 3 in a different area. If you want more guns and new story, download a mod. Don't waste your money on New Vegas.
You havent done your homework, eh? First off, new story is a big deal. That's 90% of the reason I play certain games (Fallout series being one of them). Also, there are new radial menus for controlling your followers, there are modifications you can make to your own weapons (grenade launching machine-gun), AND it's given back to Obsidian (formerly Black Isle) who created the first two games of the series. To think this wont be a different game is just crazy.
Woooww... Look, companion wheel and weapon modification. Aside from the story those are the ONLY differentiating features from Fallout 3. How long has this been in production? 2 years, maybe more? I'm sorry, but if I'm going to wait for 2 years, I expect a lot more than that from a game that is engine- and gameplay-wise nearly identical to its predecessor. And seriously? You'd pay 60 American Dollaroos JUST for these 2 small features that games, both RPGs and FPSs, have had for several years and a story? I wouldn't nor do I think anyone else should.
The upgrades are enough to have me sold. I had hundreds of hours into the first one -- why do they have to change something that was obviously successful? That's the problem with LOADS of sequels and franchises. If it aint broke, dont fix it man..
Honestly, is REALLY worth 60 bucks? "If it aint broke, don't fix it". Well, I already have that content sitting on my shelf, so why would I pay full price for a game where most of the content is identical to something I've already bought? I don't see this as a new game, and it really isn't. It's an expansion pack. If this were 20 bucks, even 30, I'd buy it the day it came out.
I know we're arguing opinions here, but that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. That's like saying Halo 2, 3, and ODST should have been expansions for Halo 1.
Now, I haven't played any Halo after number 2, but I'm know that each of the sequels went trough heavy gameplay refinement, engine upgrades, graphical upgrades and feature upgrades. I'd even justify calling ODST a semi-proper sequel due to the fact that it plays completely differently from Halo 3, despite the game being based on the exact same engine.
So lets wait and see what Fallout: New Vegas does before we start criticizing. They've made enough changes for it to feel different, but not make me uncomfortable.
Mazrix, while I agree that the list with new features seems to be short, lets not forget what happened to SupCom2. I'd rather take an overpriced expansion pack than a sequel with a bunch of new features that plays completely different (way worse in my opinion).
